Oh man, when Selena Gomez offers a rebuttal to Stewart's misinformation, you guys are going to be so embarrassed.  

8 minutes ago, we_gotta_believe said:

"Jon Stewart is a know-nothing celebrity who should stay out of politics!", brought to you by the band of low-info dimwits that voted for a reality game show host as President.

And believed him when he said the election was stolen 

2 hours ago, Kz! said:

Or how about the kind, benevolent democrats just remove "the objectionable parts" if they really want the bill to pass.

Sure. That makes total sense. Let's just make it OK to retroactively redefine what is and isn't "objectionable" based on political feelers. It's working out so well for burn pit veterans so far.

Or, you know, pass the bill you voted to pass and not be little b**ches about it.

I don't know., man. That's a real Sophie's Choice. 

2 minutes ago, mayanh8 said:

Sure. That makes total sense. Let's just make it OK to retroactively redefine what is and isn't "objectionable" based on political feelers. It's working out so well for burn pit veterans so far.

Or, you know, pass the bill you voted to pass and not be little b**ches about it.

I don't know., man. That's a real Sophie's Choice. 

I don't know, man, I think I'll wait until I hear what Miley Cyrus has to say about this before drawing conclusions. 

The resolution is simple. Pass the Pact Act as it was already agreed to.

Instead of paying it lip service then denying veterans access to badly needed healthcare after serving our country, like these Republicans did.

I notice that zuker and company still have failed to show what objectionable stuff was added by the house, as they claim.

 

Guess we have to wait for them to make up new lies on Fox that they can parrot?

3 minutes ago, Toastrel said:

I notice that zuker and company still have failed to show what objectionable stuff was added by the house, as they claim.

 

Guess we have to wait for them to make up new lies on Fox that they can parrot?

Just now, Kz! said:

Yes, that's Jon Stewart's face.   But back to Toaster's point, can you or your right wing media gods show what was added into the bill between June and now that Republicans found so objectionable that they had to reverse course and screw over dying vets?

Before:

After:

 

"Rob Schneider is way funnier than Jon Stewart" - 2022 Republicans

KZ: If they just remove the objectional parts from the bill, the Republicans in the senate would vote for it?

Everyone to KZ: Ok, what are the "objectional parts" you're talking about?

KZ: I don't know but here's a picture of Jon Stewart's face!

10 minutes ago, Phillyterp85 said:

KZ: If they just remove the objectional parts from the bill, the Republicans in the senate would vote for it?

Everyone to KZ: Ok, what are the "objectional parts" you're talking about?

KZ: I don't know but here's a picture of Jon Stewart's face!

It's already been discussed. I can't discuss it any harder.

On 7/31/2022 at 7:14 PM, TEW said:

 

The issue is in how the spending is classified. By making it mandatory spending, it opens up $400B in future discretionary spending. Essentially it becomes a potential Trojan horse/poison pill to $400B in discretionary spending on future, unrelated programs.

The fact that the bill does not add this spending in the present is irrelevant to this accounting procedure’s potential for future abuse.

The solution is pretty straight forward: make it discretionary spending. That way Democrats can’t be accused of trying to use sick veterans as a shield for pork and Republicans don’t have an excuse to not vote for it if they do, in fact, support it.

I think most Americans would agree that we should help veterans who were exposed to toxins from burn pits but also not use sick veterans as a vehicle to spend nearly half a trillion dollars on things completely unrelated to veterans. I think you’d agree with that, right? 

Should be an easy fix since both sides definitely want to help veterans. I'm sure the democrats will be reasonable and amend the bill appropriately to get this thing done and not try to drag this on for political gamesmanship.    

The only reason those Republicans in favor of the bill initially flipped, is because they were pissed they couldn't stop Biden's Energy and Climate bill.  They were getting back at the President, only to alienate a large portion of their base in veterans.  Well done.

6 minutes ago, barho said:

The only reason those Republicans in favor of the bill initially flipped, is because they were pissed they couldn't stop Biden's Energy and Climate bill.  They were getting back at the President, only to alienate a large portion of their base in veterans.  Well done.

That's certainly what libtards and Jon Stewart are saying. So it's probably not true.

34 minutes ago, Kz! said:

It's already been discussed. I can't discuss it any harder.

Should be an easy fix since both sides definitely want to help veterans. I'm sure the democrats will be reasonable and amend the bill appropriately to get this thing done and not try to drag this on for political gamesmanship.    

Yup and as it has already been explained, the funding was classified as mandatory in the original bill, which the republicans in the senate already voted for.  The house didn't make any changes to that part, and no amendment has been offered up by republicans in the senate to change that classification.

So let's try again, what are these "objectionable parts" of the bill? 

https://mobile.twitter.com/JohnFetterman/status/1554468247675830273?cn=ZmxleGlibGVfcmVjcw%3D%3D&refsrc=email

35 minutes ago, Phillyterp85 said:

Yup and as it has already been explained, the funding was classified as mandatory in the original bill, which the republicans in the senate already voted for.  The house didn't make any changes to that part, and no amendment has been offered up by republicans in the senate to change that classification.

So let's try again, what are these "objectionable parts" of the bill? 

I don't have to try again. Republicans that voted against it are literally saying what they found objectionable. That they didn't find it objectionable before Biden's massive spending proposals got OK'd doesn't really make a difference to me. 

So now dems can quit playing political football with the veterans I'm sure they deeply care about and compromise with republicans who now find portions of the bill objectionable. 

42 minutes ago, Kz! said:

I don't have to try again. Republicans that voted against it are literally saying what they found objectionable. That they didn't find it objectionable before Biden's massive spending proposals got OK'd doesn't really make a difference to me. 

So now dems can quit playing political football with the veterans I'm sure they deeply care about and compromise with republicans who now find portions of the bill objectionable. 

Oh, so what you’re saying is senate republicans voted for a bill that they found objectionable.   That’s very strange behavior by them then.   What happened, did they forget that they found those parts objectionable but then a month later remembered the parts that they objected to?

 

so funny (and predictable) that you think it’s the democrats playing political football here.  Not the republicans who voted for a bill, and then a month later changed their mind and voted against the very bill they had previously voted for. 

56 minutes ago, Kz! said:

I don't have to try again. Republicans that voted against it are literally saying what they found objectionable. That they didn't find it objectionable before Biden's massive spending proposals got OK'd doesn't really make a difference to me. 

So now dems can quit playing political football with the veterans I'm sure they deeply care about and compromise with republicans who now find portions of the bill objectionable. 

"You can't make me answer you!! REEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE" 

16 minutes ago, Phillyterp85 said:

Oh, so what you’re saying is senate republicans voted for a bill that they found objectionable.   That’s very strange behavior by them then.   What happened, did they forget that they found those parts objectionable but then a month later remembered the parts that they objected to?

 

so funny (and predictable) that you think it’s the democrats playing political football here.  Not the republicans who voted for a bill, and then a month later changed their mind and voted against the very bill they had previously voted for. 

Meh, they changed their minds after Biden's libtard spending package got pushed through. Feel free to cry about it if you want. Dems can suck it up and cut the libtard free money portion of the bill. 

So now the story changes to, "Yeah, actually you may be right, it's still the libtards fault. Here's a Jon Stewart face. REEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE!!!

If L taking was a sport then @Kz! would be the CVON BMOC. There wouldn't even be a close 2nd.

1 minute ago, mayanh8 said:

 REEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE 

Yep, sounds about right considering I've answered multiple times now. Man, libtards are getting more desperate and retarded by the day. It's incredible.  

Just now, mayanh8 said:

So now the story changes to, "Yeah, actually you may be right, it's still the libtards fault. Here's a Jon Stewart face. REEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE!!!

If L taking was a sport then @Kz! would be the CVON BMOC. There wouldn't even be a close 2nd.

Yep, full blown retarded liberal hissy fit confirmed.  

Just now, Kz! said:

Yep, sounds about right considering I've answered multiple times now. Man, libtards are getting more desperate and retarded by the day. It's incredible.  

Hey at least you're now admitting that R's went back on their word and screwed the veterans. I'll be totally honest... I wasn't expecting that.

Just now, mayanh8 said:

Hey at least you're now admitting that R's went back on their word and screwed the veterans. I'll be totally honest... I wasn't expecting that.

Yeah they totally "went back on their word"

*insert Jon Stewart weeping uncontrollably here*